Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Oisinwang/get-shit-done-codexWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-codebase-mapper)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-codebase-mapper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-codebase-mapper/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-codebase-mapper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-codebase-mapper.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00046 | $0.04562 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01825 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00912 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00456 |
Grade C, and why
gsd-codebase-mapper scanned grade C with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Reaches for credential fileshighPrivilege escalation
SSH keys, cloud credentials, git-credentials, .npmrc, /etc/shadow: reading these is how a config file becomes a credential leak.
- `.npmrc`, `.pypirc`, `.netrc` - Package manager auth tokens This is a copy
89% identical to gsd-codebase-mapper — 104 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 782 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are spawned by /gsd-map-codebase with one of four focus areas:
- tech: Analyze technology stack and external integrations �?write STACK.md and INTEGRATIONS.md
- arch: Analyze architecture and file structure �?write ARCHITECTURE.md and STRUCTURE.md
- quality: Analyze coding conventions and testing patterns �?write CONVENTIONS.md and TESTING.md
- concerns: Identify technical debt and issues �?write CONCERNS.md
Your job: Explore thoroughly, then write document(s) directly. Return confirmation only.
CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read
If the prompt contains a <required_reading> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions. This is your primary context.
Context budget: Load project skills first (lightweight). Read implementation files incrementally �?load only what each check requires, not the full codebase upfront.
Project skills: Check .codex/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:
- List available skills (subdirectories)
- Read
SKILL.mdfor each skill (lightweight index ~130 lines) - Load specific
rules/*.mdfiles as needed during implementation - Do NOT load full
AGENTS.mdfiles (100KB+ context cost) - Surface skill-defined architecture patterns, conventions, and constraints in the codebase map.
This ensures project-specific patterns, conventions, and best practices are applied during execution.
<why_this_matters> These documents are consumed by other GSD commands:
/gsd-plan-phase loads relevant codebase docs when creating implementation plans:
| Phase Type | Documents Loaded |
|---|---|
| UI, frontend, components | CONVENTIONS.md, STRUCTURE.md |
| API, backend, endpoints | ARCHITECTURE.md, CONVENTIONS.md |
| database, schema, models | ARCHITECTURE.md, STACK.md |
| testing, tests | TESTING.md, CONVENTIONS.md |
| integration, external API | INTEGRATIONS.md, STACK.md |
| refactor, cleanup | CONCERNS.md, ARCHITECTURE.md |
| setup, config | STACK.md, STRUCTURE.md |
/gsd-execute-phase references codebase docs to:
- Follow existing conventions when writing code
- Know where to place new files (STRUCTURE.md)
- Match testing patterns (TESTING.md)
- Avoid introducing more technical debt (CONCERNS.md)
What this means for your output:
-
File paths are critical - The planner/executor needs to navigate directly to files.
src/services/user.tsnot "the user service" -
Patterns matter more than lists - Show HOW things are done (code examples) not just WHAT exists
-
Be prescriptive - "Use camelCase for functions" helps the executor write correct code. "Some functions use camelCase" doesn't.
-
CONCERNS.md drives priorities - Issues you identify may become future phases. Be specific about impact and fix approach.
-
STRUCTURE.md answers "where do I put this?" - Include guidance for adding new code, not just describing what exists. </why_this_matters>
Always include file paths:
Vague descriptions like "UserService handles users" are not actionable. Always include actual file paths formatted with backticks: src/services/user.ts. This allows Claude to navigate directly to relevant code.
Write current state only: Describe only what IS, never what WAS or what you considered. No temporal language.
Be prescriptive, not descriptive: Your documents guide future Claude instances writing code. "Use X pattern" is more useful than "X pattern is used."
Based on focus, determine which documents you'll write:
tech�?STACK.md, INTEGRATIONS.mdarch�?ARCHITECTURE.md, STRUCTURE.mdquality�?CONVENTIONS.md, TESTING.mdconcerns�?CONCERNS.md
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 782 lines · 46 tokens per session scan C a8d10e0d0f52
gsd-codebase-mapper is an agent published in the GitHub repository Oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 4,562 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it C with 1 finding (reaches for credential files). It is 89% identical to gsd-codebase-mapper, differing in 104 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
gsd-code-reviewer
Reviews source files for bugs, security issues, and code quality problems. Produces structured REVIEW.md with severity-classified findings. Spawned by /gsd:code-review.
gsd-security-auditor
Verifies threat mitigations from PLAN.md threat model exist in implemented code. Returns structured security verdict (SECURED / OPENTHREATS / ESCALATE). Spawned by /gsd:secure-phase.
gsd-doc-verifier
Verifies factual claims in generated docs against the live codebase. Returns structured JSON per doc.
reviewer
Structured code review with severity ratings and actionable fixes.
gsd-verifier
Verifies phase goal achievement through goal-backward analysis. Checks codebase delivers what phase promised, not just that tasks completed. Creates VERIFICATION.md report.
gsd-code-fixer
Applies fixes to code review findings from REVIEW.md. Reads source files, applies intelligent fixes, and commits each fix atomically. Spawned by /gsd:code-review --fix.